I sincerely hope that there is enough rational thought out there that people recognize the difference between acts done in the name of Christ and what Christ himself taught. People given too much power do horrible things. It doesn't matter much what their theological underpinnings are.

To say that the elimination of religion (atheism) was not a major motivating force for either man... both of whom were to be viewed as gods by their societies seems a vast overstatement.

I find it ridiculous that the "scientific" or perhaps even self-proclaimed "enlightened" mindset on Christianity is that it all boils down to the crusades. It is no different than saying since Hitler or Stalin were atheists that all atheism boils down to genocide and will for all time. (I know this is a repost... didn't realize I wasn't logged in)

This is obviously the case for the social media outlets that this bill would touch (Facebook, Google+, etc.). It'll just be interesting to see where the governmental shoe falls. I'm not hopeful, but I suppose it's possible that people will be given priority as being just that versus their current social media status of product.

It seems to me that this will have the effect to convince at least a subset of roughly high school aged children that they should accept no responsibility for their actions, especially as they relate to sex. I understand and agree with preventing disease, suffering, and death. To that end, no doubt this vaccine will be effective. I just wonder what you teach your child about virtue as a world where freedom from consequence whether natural or societal becomes more and more the highest good.

Old-fashioned because you only do one of two sensible things and act like a choice between the two is the only viable path? I don't think so. The idea that your child is capable of making adult decisions and in fact should be exposed to adult situations at extremely young ages is very new.

whitehouse.(choose carefully here)

And how is preventing your children from being able to view pornographic content not parenting?

Interesting. Thanks for the reply! I may have to waste $20 just to pull one of those dumb things apart.

I have no expertise in RFID chips, but I'd be curious what defines "long range". According to this paper, a passive (non-powered) 15cm RFID antenna is effective at a range up to 4.9 meters (and I believe this number assumes a non-directional scanner). That is certainly less distance than is between the windshield and the readers above the road.

Can you provide more insight into how you are defining "long range" and "very short range"? It looks like modern RFID tech can passively be scanned up to 40 feet in "normal conditions", and I'd have to assume that interstate, windshield-mounted, directional travel is rather normal.

Indeed. I will make a note of not submitting crap in the future that is untrue. The sealed part certainly is true, but they have a battery.

Except the I-PASS is a one-time $20 deposit that is returned on return of the I-PASS...

The old models only have a battery because they beep and some (perhaps all) have a display showing your I-PASS balance. The newer models are entirely sealed, and do not require a battery because they work by RFID chips. This post is a bit ridiculous.

If you want the reasoning... go no farther than the I-PASS website (quoted below):

Not sure if it's a security setting, but I can't get that site to load the plugin in IE, period. On my corporate intranet, we have a back end remote management item for all the computers on the domain that is jave-based. No matter how I set the add-on settings for java, the applet loads right up. Restart included.

Everything. I have been continuously testing that fact since a co-worker was the victim of a java exploit. Whether it's disabled or not, IE loads Java exactly the same.

It probably made you feel warm and fuzzy to do so. However, if you now go to a site that is java enabled, you will see that you just accomplished nothing by your efforts. Java is still woefully enabled.